264 Win Mag

thoughts and experience on this caliber as there is one for sale locally for $450 in very decent shape, did not get a real good look,
as some else was handling it, and I didn't have time to stick around. I called the shop later and it is still there!

I can comment on the cartridge but you haven't told us anything about the rifle.

AFAIK, 264 Mag is the smallest belted magnum there is (I may well be wrong). 6.5mm is an excellent caliber offering a lot of performance for relative recoil. The 140 gr at @ 2900 fps has recoil similar to 165 gr factory load from a similar weight 30-06. The round is very flat shooting and roughly 300 - 500 fps faster than its non-magnum 6.5 siblings. The issue is short leade in the chamber. This means you max out at 140 gr bullets. They will do for any deer but you may not be comfortable with 140 grs for elk, for example. The round was eclipsed by the 7mm Rem Mag which offers a greater range of bullets up to the 175 gr launched at just less than the 140 gr in the .264 WinMag.

Great cartridge but you will really have to hand load for it. As to whether it's worth it, that depends on the rifle.

xfyrfiter

January 26, 2013, 07:12 PM

Also, you need to look closely at the throat, as 264 is known to be a little hard on barrell life.

jerkface11

January 26, 2013, 09:18 PM

Handload for it and use the slowest powder you can get your hands on. I use surplus military IMR 5010 with good results.

witchhunter

January 26, 2013, 09:31 PM

The 7mm Magnum will do anything the .264 Win Mag will do. Better bullet selection, availability of ammo, etc. That being said, I have always wanted one.

DM~

January 26, 2013, 10:19 PM

AFAIK, 264 Mag is the smallest belted magnum there is (I may well be wrong).

Yup, you are wrong! lol

I shot a 264 Win. Mag. for a time, shot some big game with it... After using the 7mm Rem. Mag., i never went back to the 264.

The 7RM was just so much more versatile and i liked the way the 7mm bullets worked on big game much better than the 6.5's.

Of course, as a deer rifle, it really doesn't matter as both are waaaay more than you need for a deer.

DM

788Ham

January 27, 2013, 12:10 AM

I've got a .264, shoots lights out too ! I shot a 5 point bull elk about 7 years ago with it, 140 gr. Hornady Spire point, 4831 powder, 55.4 gr., knocked him flat on his butt, 325 yards. Excellent mushroom on the bullet, I've never shot any, but you can also shoot 160 gr. bullets in the .264, good luck.

tahoe2

January 27, 2013, 01:23 AM

RPRNY; it's an Interarms Mark X that was rebarreled to 264 Win Mag, shop owner doesn't know what it was before. The stock is a Monte Carlo walnut with checkering and a ebony grip cap and nose cap with a white line spacer, the butt pad has a white line spacer as well. The gun, upon closer inspection has a few scratches in the bluing as well as dents & dings in the stock ( the usual handling/hunting marks ) nothing to extreme. I offered $400, he said he would contact the owner as it is a consignment, if he doesn't agree I think I'll pass.

Gordon

January 27, 2013, 02:25 AM

Sounds iffy being somebody made it up!
Here is a 1961 Model 70 Winchester "Westerner" with 26" barrel which was the original platform for the .264WM . I have changed the old Bhuler mounts to Warne Maxima when I I took off the old Redfield 3-9 a few years back and replaced it with an early 90s V3 3.5-10x Leupold.. I sanded the old beat up stock down and matte oil finished it along with a full pressure glass bed job and lightened the trigger. It likes a full case of the old Hogdon H870 I have a partial barrel still of. It must burn cool under the Sierra 140 grain Matchking because even at over 3100 fps from that 26" barrel I still get sub 3" 200 yard groups out of a Lead Sled. This is my antelope gun and does the trick to 600 yards if I do (no more folks) . The .264 is a niche gun IMHO and ain't cheap or easy.
http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i203/gordonhulme/072.jpg

redneck2

January 27, 2013, 08:37 AM

If you don't hand load, you might wanna check ammo price/availability. I'm thinking ammo would be north of $4 each and kinda hard to find. I have a friend that just decided to get ammo for his .300 H&H. $82/twenty....:what:

Lloyd Smale

January 27, 2013, 09:08 AM

Its a great round, one of my favorites. Any real world differnce in power or barrel life between it and a 7rem mag is posted by people that havent used both.

RPRNY

January 27, 2013, 10:16 AM

$400 sounds like a generous but sane offer. Good luck and if you get it, enjoy.

JimKirk

January 27, 2013, 10:38 AM

AFAIK, 264 Mag is the smallest belted magnum there is (I may well be wrong). Yep wrong!

The .224 Weatherby Magnum would be the smallest commercial cartridges ... I'm sure there are other wildcats ....

The .264 Winchester is a fine cartridge... with today powders and with the high B.C. 6.5 caliber bullets that are out there now.

I recently worked with a Whidden Gun Works custom on a Rem. 700 action 24" .264 mag with 120 gr Berger bullets.... the very first three shot we put though it went in a .381" group at 100 yards ... velocity was not where we wanted and worked it on up to 3300+ fps and still got a .718 three shot group at 100 yards.

There have been at least eight deer killed with it since the beginning of last season ... most DRT, but a few did make 10 yards or so.

It is a "reloader" gun ... would not rely on factory ammo ....

DM~

January 27, 2013, 11:31 AM

Its a great round, one of my favorites. Any real world differnce in power or barrel life between it and a 7rem mag is posted by people that havent used both.

Really?? How big of animals have you shot with both to know that?? OR are you making the comparison by shooting deer?

Try them both of brown bear and get back to me! OR even moose for that matter.

DM

Zeke/PA

January 27, 2013, 11:38 AM

The .264 Magnum made it's debut just about the time that Winchester came out with their "Free Floating Barrel" sudden revelation!
That particular "revelation" actually a production shortcut, in my mind, REALLY meant the end of a great rifle, namley the Winchester Model 70.
I did however deal with a few .264's, they shot well and were popular with my compadres that did some "Out West " hunting.
Good shooting calibre ESPECIALLY with hand loads.
Is your rifle a Model 70 by chance?

murf

January 27, 2013, 12:08 PM

it is the ballistic twin of the 270 winchester. good bullet selection as it is 6.5mm. if you don't reload, i would suggest something else. mine copper-fouls the barrel something awful, so i keep it clean. accurate with the right load. fwiw

murf

Lloyd Smale

January 27, 2013, 12:42 PM

Really?? How big of animals have you shot with both to know that?? OR are you making the comparison by shooting deer?

Try them both of brown bear and get back to me! OR even moose for that matter.

Whos talking big bear anyway. Dont know about you but if im hunting big bear it sure as hell wouldnt be with either of those rounds. Both are basicaly used for long range DEER, antelope and elk and either will do just fine on those animals. Neither would be my choise for something that could bite back. As to experience with both on deer id bet a dime to a house ive shot at least as many with both as you have. Id like to see one instance wher an animal properly hit with one would die and the other would walk away.

sage5907

January 27, 2013, 01:22 PM

The 264 magnum has always had a magic ring to me ever since Doug Burris took the largest typical mule deer with one in SW Colorado. I've never owned one but I have owned a 270 Weatherby which is comparable. The price seems reasonable for a Mark X mauser but I wouldn't even consider the purchase if I didn't reload ammo.

DM~

January 27, 2013, 06:38 PM

Whos talking big bear anyway. Dont know about you but if im hunting big bear it sure as hell wouldnt be with either of those rounds. Both are basicaly used for long range DEER, antelope and elk and either will do just fine on those animals. Neither would be my choise for something that could bite back. As to experience with both on deer id bet a dime to a house ive shot at least as many with both as you have. Id like to see one instance wher an animal properly hit with one would die and the other would walk away.

Exactly, as i already said, both are more than needed for deer...

Lloyd Smale: Any real world differnce in power or barrel life between it and a 7rem mag is posted by people that havent used both.

If you think a properly loaded 7 Rem. Mag. isn't enough for brown bear, that's on you and how well you shoot, NOT the 7mm Rem. Mag.!

I DO have plenty of experience hunting brown bear, and a 7RM is big medicine for brown bear, it will drop them in their tracks with a lot of damage to the bear, a lot of bears are taken with them each year. Something less than a good hit, and having a bigger gun won't make any difference at all.

BTW, i also shot a brown bear with a 264 Win. Mag. so i'm not guessing here as i have used both!

DM

Lloyd Smale

January 28, 2013, 08:30 AM

got to ask if that one you shot with the 264 died??

The_Armed_Therapist

January 28, 2013, 09:46 AM

Fantastic round, as far as performance. It'll likely kill anything .30-06 will, and has a great trajectory in the middle-long ranges. But, the cost of the ammo would prevent me from ever touching it. .270 and 7mm mag will get you almost identical performances for far less money.

DM~

January 28, 2013, 10:40 AM

got to ask if that one you shot with the 264 died??
eventually...

DM

tahoe2

January 28, 2013, 10:39 PM

well I called the LGS after work today and some body snapped it up, right after I left. The shop owner didn't even get to call the owner, and the customer paid the full amount. He was listening to us talk about it for about 15 minutes, and couldn't resist, as soon as I walked out he said "I'll take it". Shop owner apologized, I said what for? you are in business to sell guns. I didn't need it anyway, something better will come along.

Gordon

January 28, 2013, 11:01 PM

Try a .270 WSM, it's "better" . Probably the best part is modern premium bullets are used by the ammo suppliers, although it DOES seem more intrinsically accurate. Like the .264WM it is a noticeable step up in flat trajectory over the .270Win. which I shot 40 years so I ought to know.

SwampWolf

February 1, 2013, 04:40 PM

I don't think you missed out on too much, tahoe2. Imo, $450.00 (or even $400.00) isn't that great of a deal for a rifle with a mucked up finish and an after-market barrel that, as Gordon opined, "Sounds iffy being somebody made it up". On the other hand, had it been a pre-64 Winchester Model 70 "Westerner", even in the same condition as described, well...you could probably have added a couple of hundred dollars to the price and still had gotten a good deal.